Comments

1 - 20 of 129 | Next »

• December 28, 2009 - 9:54pm patrick4rent Says:

  Here is a great place------- Cougarmatching.com ------- It's a premiere cougar dating community for older women seeking younger men and men seeking older womem. Come in, post a message, a picture of yourself and check out the hot photo galleries. You will find someone you like here... http://www.topnflnews.com/

• December 25, 2009 - 2:11am Debra Says:

  I think the ad is absolutely disgusting...there is no compromise...she's using a crucifix to cover her nudity...for an animal adoption promotion!...and rosaries...please, tell me why they think this is going to increase animal adoption! Unbelieveable!!!

• December 11, 2009 - 9:37am bb Says:

  catholics need to lighten up!!! they believe god is the only judge,right? PRACTICE WHAT YOU PREACH!!!

• December 08, 2009 - 5:26pm jaysely Says:

  LL you should do some research, PETA are a terrorist organization, you can't fund the bombing of research labs no matter what the cause and not be. As well as hypocrites, no animal testing for medical reasons, yet they use insulin... In any case, i'm athiest and this add offends me. There's no reason for her to be naked in this add holding such religious symbols. She doesn't have to be dressed in a burka, but she certainly has no call for being nude either.

• December 08, 2009 - 4:27pm jwbm Says:

  "I'm doing what the Catholic Church should be doing, working to stop senseless suffering of animals, the most defenseless of god's creation" Thanks, Joanna. Too bad the Bible states that God created humans to dominate the beasts. But technicality aside, it's a pretty unimaginative move on PeTA's part to use sex and offense to grab attention. I can only hope that the organization finds some new method other than breasts to get their message across to the general public.

• December 08, 2009 - 7:56am Jared Says:

  yes, the woman IS beautiful, no arguments here. However, I have to agree with Marie... PeTA was pretty ignorant to put out an add like this assuming it wouldn't cause some sort of controversy from the church. Usually when the church makes a big deal about something "offending" the name of the church or the religion I disagree. That's not the case this time. There's a nude woman using a cross to cover her nipples and the absolute minimum area of her crotch they were allowed just to draw people in using sex. It's not about your faith, or weather you support their cause or weather you like seeing a sexy woman covering herself with a thin piece of metal bar... it's having respect for a large population's beliefs and traditions. not only did they put angel wings on her but they gave her a cross and to top it off put her in a church! It's rude, disrespectful, and inconsiderate to the Christian religion as a whole! I'm positive PeTA lost respect from a lot of people w/ this ad.

• December 07, 2009 - 9:09am John Harrison Says:

  The cross never looked better.maybe people would rather see how their food is raised and slaughtered.lighten up...the woman is beautiful.

• December 06, 2009 - 3:43pm Marie Says:

  I'd say the reason why anyone would find this offensive is because she's using the cross, a religious symbol, to emphasize her nipples and genitalia. It's not an artistic picture, it's one clearly composed so as to draw your attention to her sexual side. Previously, PETA has the campaign, "I'd rather go naked than wear fur." In these photos, it made sense for the models to be nude. Being sexy and being an angel to animals by adopting-- those two don't tie together in any way at all. It's purely the use of sex to grab the viewer's attention. Many individuals of Catholic denomination DO consider sexual promiscuity unseemly, to say the least, so it's not the least bit surprising that they'd find it offensive when symbols which they consider holy are used in a purely sexual sense. I'm surprised none of you see that sex doesn't fit into this aspect of the campaign at all. Frankly, even as an agnostic, I'm offended that PETA thinks I wouldn't pick up on their blatant use of sex. They expect you to look, see a hot model, and support their cause without ever wondering, "Wait, these two don't have anything to do together, what is this bull?" And many of you have. Congratulations on your intellectual passivity.

• December 06, 2009 - 2:40pm Malwina Says:

  She is beautiful like every polish girl:)

• December 06, 2009 - 9:13am Tim Says:

  beautiful pic. no where as bad as a priest having sex with little boys

• December 05, 2009 - 9:50pm Alina Says:

  LaChica, how dare you try and make this into a race issue? I'm embarassed that someone from my country would engage in such a disgusting ad campaign. This is a vain attempt to use sex to promote more PETA brainwashing. None of PETA's funds go to save animals, they go towards advertising. Using her religion to justify that ad campaign is a disgusting new low.

• December 04, 2009 - 11:51pm mm Says:

  a practicing catholic. really. y is she shocked then. more like fallen angel. the sex part had nothing to do with the animal. she has no respect for herself let alone god.

• December 04, 2009 - 7:14pm LL Says:

  "Daisy" your statement is ignorant .. why don't you do some research before calling PETA a hateful organization .. Seriously people - its a picture, for an amazing cause.. If you don't like the picture , dont look at it!

• December 04, 2009 - 7:00pm LL Says:

  "Daisy" your comment is ignorant.. why don't you do some research about PETA before calling is a hateful organization.. Seriously people, its a picture - calm down .. it's for a good cause and if you don't like it, dont look at it..

• December 04, 2009 - 6:43pm mhmm, Says:

  people are missing the bigger picture, get over the naked girl... its a creative ad, it offends the church, thats fine i totally understand.. but seriously its promoting peta (people for the ethical treatment of animals).

• December 04, 2009 - 3:00pm Bobby Says:

  HEY STUPID CATHOLIC CHURCH: WHY ARE THE NUDES ON THE CEILING OF THE SISTINE CHAPEL OK? and this is not - HYPOCRITES!!!!!!

• December 04, 2009 - 1:35pm Daisy Says:

  Bottom line, PETA is a hateful organization.

• December 04, 2009 - 11:15am philly Says:

  You're bashing the wrong group. The article states "The Catholic League has condemned..." it does not say the Catholic Church. The League is a self-run organization with speaks out against what IT views as derogatory or harmful to Catholics/the Church - like PETA does for animals. It represents the views of SOME Catholics but does not speak for all Catholics or from the Catholic Church hierarchy. It receives no funds from the Church - it is funded by member donations. It is somewhat similar to the Jewish Anti-Defamation League.

• December 04, 2009 - 10:28am adam Says:

  If the Catholic church (of which I am no longer a part) were not so afraid of females and especially their bodies, I'd still be practicing today. Telling women to "cover up" is not respect. I see no obscenity in that picture, just female beauty. I suppose if the woman were covered from head to toe like a nun, people would be fine with it. Such an attitude is not about modesty, it's about shame. The woman in the picture appears very proud, powerful, and beautiful, and that's what scares the church and many of the people in it.

• December 04, 2009 - 12:37am LaChica Says:

  Thank You real practicing Catholic for what you've said! Joanna is sacriligious and an embarrasment to those who practice their faith in modesty, will the real Catholics please stand up?! Oh yeah, we just did. See Joanna, it's ordinary Catholics like myself who are disgusted with you, oh let's say the 1.1 billion of us, and it's not just the officials you're gonna get criticism from. What is with you polish women modeling for playboy and magazines and yet calling yourself Christian?

1 - 20 of 129 | Next »